Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Windows Media Player 11 and Urge

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 8 years ago | from the toggling-the-new-toys dept.

488

j0e_average writes "The Washington Post is running a review of Microsoft's next version of Media Player, and its integration with MTV's new music service Urge. According to reviewer, Rob Pegoraro, 'Not only does this new, Windows XP-only software promote Urge to the exclusion of other retailers, you can't shop at this store-- or even just play your Urge downloads -- in any earlier version of Windows Media Player.' The Microsoft/Urge subscription model contains a new twist as well: 'Urge also lets you rent songs: $9.95 a month (or $99 a year) lets you download all the tracks you want to a computer, while $14.95 ($149 a year) lets you transfer those downloads to most newer Windows Media-compatible players. These rented songs can't be burned to CD and go silent if you stop paying the fees.'"

cancel ×

488 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first p0st (1)

ShortBeard (740119) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378074)

Did I make it? First post.

i bet (5, Funny)

bensafrickingenius (828123) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378075)

"These rented songs can't be burned to CD and go silent if you stop paying the fees"

Oh reeeeely? We'll see.

Re:i bet (1)

Ichigo Kurosaki (886802) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378091)

DRM is not as easy to break as you suggest.

If it is please show me where i can find a tool to remove the drm from music purcahsed from itunes.

Re:i bet (5, Insightful)

rocjoe71 (545053) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378097)

Go to Radio Shack and run a patch cord from your soundcard to the soundcard of your friends computer.

...File this one under "If I can hear it, I can record it."

Re:i bet (2, Insightful)

Ichigo Kurosaki (886802) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378110)

While this may be an option to extract data from drm'ed music, there are far easier ways of obtaining free music. My point was that one on has been able to strip the drm from the music files and most likely do it with urge either.

Re:i bet (5, Informative)

Willuknight (872781) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378183)

Why complicate things. Download Audacity and record your stereo output.

Re:i bet (3, Interesting)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378131)

Didn't PlayFair do that over a year ago?

But this DRM shit is why I refuse to use itunes- allofmp3.com for me.

Re:i bet (1)

benow (671946) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378197)

There's non-drm on allofmp3.

Re:i bet (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378207)

You misread- I meant allofmp3.com is what I use.

Re:i bet (2, Informative)

jtdennis (77869) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378206)

you can still burn songs purchased from iTunes, they limit the number of burns of a playlist, but not the number of burns per song. With iTMS you have access to the file as long as you have the file, and you can burn it as a data file on a CD or as a standard audio cd.

Re:i bet (5, Funny)

Kamineko (851857) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378204)

Shhh! Don't tell anybody, but there's these holes [tigerdirect.com] , right, at the back of the computer, yeah?

Audio comes -out- of one, right? Goes to your speakers.

Well, our informants in the underground scene have reported that you can use an top-of-the-line, cracker-produced, DRM-busting hyper-cable, and subtley 're-direct' the flow of audio, into an 'audio recording device'. Or, more ingeniously, back into the computer, and into an 'audio recording application'.

Mum's the word.

Re:i bet (1)

Kamineko (851857) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378213)

(Or you could just use the 'Recording Options' in the Sound module in Control Panel, and use Windows' own Sound Recorder. Wait a minute... Windows comes with it's own DRM busting stuff... gawsh... that's got to be a legal hiccup somewhere, right?)

Re:i bet (0)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378229)

If it is please show me where i can find a tool to remove the drm from music purcahsed from itunes.

1) Burn the songs to CD in plain unprotected CDDA format.
2) Rip your new disc into mp3/ogg/flac/etc
3) ???
4) Profit

Why certainly! (5, Informative)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378235)

I believe you would be looking for the Hymn project [hymn-project.org] .

And just for shits and giggles, you could use FreeMe [cryptome.org] or DRM2WMV [slashdot.org] for Windows Media 10 DRM'd files.

Trust me, cracking 11 is just a matter of time.

Re:i bet (1)

murderlegendre (776042) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378094)

Why rent, when you can squat?

Re:i bet (4, Insightful)

SparksMcGee (812424) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378117)

Doubtless people are going to be having a lot of fun at MTV and Microsoft's expense, and a lot of good points will be made. But personally I think this is a reasonably solid business model if the selection is decent, and ultimately I think it'd be good for the market if this were widely adopted. I don't have moral objections to paying for music I like (necessarily), but even iTunes is IMHO a somewhat expensive proposition--I could likely rattle off 20 songs I like in 20 seconds, and there's $20 right there. It's great for individual songs, but it just can't hope to compete with the size of music library I'd personally like to accumulate. However, when you take off the song cap for a reasonable price (and I think 33 cents a day is pretty reasonable), you've piqued my interest pretty well. In essence, I think that this represents a reasonable lowering of prices to a point where I can actually get all the music I want as a consumer at a price that I don't consider absurd (goodness knows the RIAA has seemed reluctant enough to compromise on that last point).

My guess is this won't be perfect--I have certain reservations about MTV as a distributor, inasmuch as I have no basis for assuming that they'll be competent and, given the performance of other services (a la Napster) the burden of proof is on them. Nevertheless, despite points to the contrary, I believe that this is unquestionably a step in the right direction. It represents a value to the consumer and, moreover, some real competition in the ITMS/iPod dominated digital music market--who knows, it might even persuade people that there are reasonable alternatives to a $400 piece of music-playing hardware(not that I'm claiming the iPod is a bad product, but it's Apple--charing a premium for hardware is what they DO).

Resonable price is not renting (1)

Monkeyboy4 (789832) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378149)

Any time consumers agree to rent music is bad for copyright* and fair use. If $.99 is too much, use allofmp3 -they have a great pricing model and if the music industry was truly a free market, we would see more of it.

When we rent music from MSFT or anyone else, we are agreeing to the farce of an idea that we have only purchased a license to listen, and a license that we must renew each month. I, for one, like to purchase things once and be done with it. If i have to buy it on credit, that is one thing - a house or car is a major purchase. but music does not require long term financial consideration.

*yes, copyright. the DRM'ed version that MSFt and RIAA promote is a bastardization of the real version and harmful to the concept. A reasonable limit with fair use...that would be nice.

Re:Resonable price is not renting (1)

EvanED (569694) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378199)

I, for one, like to purchase things once and be done with it. If i have to buy it on credit, that is one thing - a house or car is a major purchase. but music does not require long term financial consideration.

Then buy it. It's not like they stopped offering CDs or iTunes. But some people will find it more convienient to rent. For instance, I will be moving into an apartment soon.

"Renting" music, no matter how you see it or DRM, is entirely different that buying on credit, and there are plenty of reasons why you might want a model like that.

Tish Tosh (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378076)

Is there someway we can apply this technology to all of John Tish's music and then not pay the fee?

Re:Tish Tosh (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378084)

John Tesh, you faggot.

By the way, I'm sorry Vito got clipped. You must be heartbroken.

Tesh! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378102)

Sorry, I wanted to say John Tesh [tesh.com] (can you tell I'm a real fan?)

Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.

It's been 7 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment

People aren't really going to Pay for it... (1)

Phantombrain (964010) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378077)

I'm betting someone (probably here) will figure out a way to bypass the security M$ put on the songs and get them free. Makes me think of their "Genuine Advantage" that was hacked with some javascript. Already shown by P2P programs, if people want the songs, they'll find ways to steal them.

They just don't get it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378078)

How many hours before the Urge/WMP DRM is cracked, turning their plan into a one-time fee for downloading thousands of songs you can play anywhere?

Re:They just don't get it. (1)

ericdano (113424) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378114)

Well, as far as I know, Protected AAC is still not broken in the latest version of iTunes. It had been hacked, but it seems Apple fixed it.

Re:They just don't get it. (1)

Dot Solipsism (972171) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378205)

No, it has not been broken. But there are some major differnces between Urge and the iTunes Music Store. 1) You own your iTunes songs. 2) They will never expire and stop working. 3) You can transfer them to CDs (then copy them back as unprotected MP3s if you'd like) 4) You can play, copy and share your music across multiple computers. 5) iTunes is a multiplatform application.

WMPlayer 11 beta (3, Informative)

penguin_asylum (822967) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378086)

I tried out the beta of windows media player 11... It's pretty nice looking, and the new organization for the music library is a lot better, but all in all it feels like a skin for windows media player 10 sometimes (not that there's anything wrong with that...) It does look much sleeker than version 10, but I'm hoping they'll make changes to skin mode as well, which currently looks the same as it did in version 10.

Re:WMPlayer 11 beta (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378153)

I tried out the beta of windows media player 11... It's pretty nice looking, and the new organization for the music library is a lot better

This is slashdot. The emphasis is on the pronoun, not the noun. Your emphasis:

windows media player 11...

Slashdot emphasis:

windows media player 11...

A minor distinction perhaps, but one which clearly needed pointing out.

but all in all it feels like a skin for windows media player 10 sometimes (not that there's anything wrong with that...)

Of course there's nothing wrong with that, and nobody would argue the point. I like having two close buttons for my media player, makes it much easier to close. Twice as easy in fact. Which is very important when it decides on it's own to start at in-oppotune times ... like (for example), when my computer wakes from hibernation.

It does look much sleeker than version 10, but I'm hoping they'll make changes to skin mode as well, which currently looks the same as it did in version 10.

I'm hoping that my media player gets better at ... playing media? AAC, XVid, DivX, QT. VLC is the default, I'd **like** that to change. Not implying that the parent post was made by a Microsoft employee or anything, but it would be **nice** if Microsoft would listen rather than speak.

Ooh! Ooh! DRM! Yay! (2, Funny)

Limburgher (523006) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378087)

Where do I sign up?

Not.

Re:Ooh! Ooh! DRM! Yay! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378140)

This would also appear to be conditional access. Restricting copying is digital rights/restrictions managment. But, by making you pay to keep your music from quiting on you, they are employing conditional access. MAKE had a good article about it.

Re:Ooh! Ooh! DRM! Yay! (2, Funny)

foundme (897346) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378141)

Not.

Yes very funny, you don't know how many bottles of champagne were popped and subsequently wasted because of your delayed 'Not' comment.

Huh? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378089)

People still pay attention to MTV?

I fixed your typo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378112)

People still pay attention to MTV?

People still pay attention to Microsoft?

Re:Huh? (1)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378236)

People still pay attention to MTV?

Wait, MTV does music? I thought they were a bad reality-television network.

How is this a new twist? (4, Interesting)

WalterGR (106787) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378090)

The Microsoft/Urge subscription model contains a new twist as well: 'Urge also lets you rent songs: $9.95 a month (or $99 a year) lets you download all the tracks you want to a computer, while $14.95 ($149 a year) lets you transfer those downloads to most newer Windows Media-compatible players. These rented songs can't be burned to CD and go silent if you stop paying the fees.'

How is this a "new twist"? Listen Rhapsody [real.com] has been using this model for years.

Re:How is this a new twist? (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378127)

I don't see the point in the $99 service unless it is used on an ultra compact computer. I listen to most of my audio away from a computer, only being able to use it at a computer is more of a leash. $149 a year isn't so bad though as it is less than buying 10-15 albums a year but having access to several thousand instead.

Re:How is this a new twist? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378158)

Yahoo and Napster both offer this as well. There's virtually no difference between any of these WMA based services except that Yahoo is slightly cheaper.

Re:How is this a new twist? (0, Offtopic)

70Bang (805280) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378171)


Grammar tip: "Effect" is a verb. "Affect" is a noun.

Really?

Effect as a noun:

"It produced an effect similar to the aurora borealis."

Affect as a verb:

"Hunger will affect my performance negatively unless I eat.."

You'd have a better cause going after people who use the "Grocer's Apostrophe" or compose|comprise.

Re:How is this a new twist? (-1, Offtopic)

EvanED (569694) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378216)

Effect as a verb:
"This new administration will effect change."

Affect as a noun:
"His affect displayed little change when informed of the bad news."

Granted, in 90% of usage "effect" is a noun and "affect" is a verb, but this needn't necessarily be true.

Re:How is this a new twist? (1)

Wilykat (79064) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378190)

So has the Yahoo! Music Engine, although they haven't been around as long as Rhapsody.

Re:How is this a new twist? (1)

hador_nyc (903322) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378196)

The Microsoft/Urge subscription model contains a new twist as well: 'Urge also lets you rent songs: $9.95 a month (or $99 a year) lets you download all the tracks you want to a computer, while $14.95 ($149 a year) lets you transfer those downloads to most newer Windows Media-compatible players. These rented songs can't be burned to CD and go silent if you stop paying the fees.' How is this a "new twist"? Listen Rhapsody [real.com] has been using this model for years.
Yeah, Yahoo Music has a service that is the same thing... only cheaper... $60 a year for the rent only option. Good thinking MS; do what your competitor is doing... a year or two later... for 50% more...

Do they honestly think this is a good idea? Maybe the MTV connection???

Should be called "Purge" (5, Funny)

myth_of_sisyphus (818378) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378092)

As in, I stopped paying my bill, and now all my music is "purged" from my computer.

Re:Should be called "Purge" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378175)

Should be called "Purge" As in, I stopped paying my bill, and now all my music is "purged" from my computer.

That act more like "Urge Overkill" to me.

Microsoft... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378180)

...fills me with an URGE to defecate! - adapted from Pink Floyd "The Wall"

Purge, that's funny. (1)

twitter (104583) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378220)

I stopped paying my bill, and now all my music is "purged" from my computer.

Who says you have to stop paying your bills to have that happen?

sigh (5, Insightful)

yagu (721525) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378093)

Music should be simple to enjoy. Music doesn't need safeguarding the way the industry jealously guards their Jewel Crowns.

I do "support" outside my everyday professional experience for family and friends, and describing "how to" is a minefield and Media Player 11/Urge don't help.

I've not verified what the article says, but the warning is WMP11 is more than an update, it's an upgrade, i.e., the only way to recover from it to previous versions is with System Restore. WTF?

I guess that helps me decide, I'm not going to load it, I'm going to steer anyone who's interested away from it, and anyone who has questions about it, I'll turn away.

I won't single out Microsoft for the miserable state of music and the ability to enjoy today. Everyone seems to be trying their best to squeeze money from entertainment. I'm not opposed to paying for entertainment, but I come from an older generation where:

  • my vinyl and CDs played on my downstairs turntable and CD player, and my upstairs equipment.
  • and played in my car (the CDs)
  • and at my friends' houses
  • and could be ripped to computers and played on mp3 players.
  • were simple (though even ripping got more complicated)

I remember early on with CDs the promise of things to come. Heck, my first CD player actually had a DIN connector on the back of it which was referenced in the manual only as "for future use". I dreamed of liner notes running to the TV, lyrics, lots of cool stuff. It never happened.

And when did album info become available? When the public contributed it via the early public CDDB database. That was a great thing, but was (and still is) fraught with errors and the fickleness of description by the first contributor in.

This was the first of many betrayals by the music industry, and I've not seen any push back that looks promising.

WMP11 is just one more non-contributor to the music-enjoying demographic. They're all selling themselves as providing an entertainment "experience". They're all full of shit.

Re:sigh (2, Informative)

kalebdf (971322) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378167)

Don't worry about downloading and installing WMP11. You CAN uninstall it.

When you get to the ADD/REMOVE Programs window, click the check box at the top that says "Show Updates."

As for the rights of our music, it should be ours (to do with it as we please--listen, rip, destroy it with a shredder, or resell it) we bought it!

-specialk

Re:sigh (3, Insightful)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378222)

They can all go to heck. I'll just sit on the back porch and play my guitar.

To quote the late Jerry Garcia: "Make up your own music".

What's the logic here? (5, Interesting)

Gothic_Walrus (692125) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378095)

Please tell me they're not seriously expecting this to compete with iTunes.

Even with MTV and Microsoft pushing it together, I think that the fact that you can't burn the music is going to turn away most of their potential customers. People are stupid, but given the choice between owning DRMed music that you can burn or renting it and watching it all vanish when you stop paying...well, I'd hope that people aren't that stupid.

Re:What's the logic here? (2, Insightful)

whoever57 (658626) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378123)

well, I'd hope that people aren't that stupid.
If he were not dead, I would suggest you talk to PT Barnum [wikipedia.org] about this (well, plus the fact that the article suggests that PT Barnum did not actually say the quote).

Re:What's the logic here? (1)

70Bang (805280) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378198)



I would suggest you talk to PT Barnum

The better quote (for this context) I've seen attributed to PT is this:

"No one ever became poor underestimating human intelligence."

("became poor" has been seen as "gone broke" and other similar fragments.

Re:What's the logic here? (2, Insightful)

ericdano (113424) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378128)

Somehow, people think the subscription model works. But, I don't see this being offered with Movies on demand. The closest thing is Netflix, but even then, it's only possible to get so many a month.

I think the appeal of having EVERYTHING at the tips of ones fingers is neat, but in reality, people don't listen to EVERYTHING. I mean, of the ten thousand plus songs I have, I listen to like 100 regularly......

Re:What's the logic here? (4, Insightful)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378130)

Please tell me they're not seriously expecting this to compete with iTunes.

It will be the default install for 95% of computers sold.

That's the great benefit of owning a monopoly. You can use it to dominate markets you wouldn't normally have a hope of even competing in.

Re:What's the logic here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378148)

Who says they need to compete with iTunes?

Different purchasing models appeal to different people with different circumstances. For example, not everyone that needs a place to live goes out at buys a house; many people rent.

Personally, I have a 30 gig iPod. If I wanted to fill it up with mp3's purchased at iTunes, it would cost me THOUSANDS of dollars. It would be much more financially responsible to fill it up with "rented" songs, as I could pay $150 a year for decades before it would have been more cost effective to buy them outright. Considering an iPod won't last more than 5 years, "renting" enough songs to fill it seems much more reasonable.

Re:What's the logic here? (1)

Crussy (954015) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378152)

Not being able to burn isn't a problem for most anymore, however if you can't put these songs on an ipod or like device, there is no way this will fly. I can't imagine mtv viewers being too thrilled about a new program if it doesn't let them put music onto their ipods.

Re:What's the logic here? (1)

Gothic_Walrus (692125) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378187)

And therein lies the rub... Like every other Windows Media-based store, Urge suffers from the Not iPod problem -- its downloads don't work on Apple's elegant music players.

Since the iPod is by far the market leader - doesn't it have something like half of the MP3 player market right now? - that's a HUGE user base that's going to, for the most part, have zero interest in this service. I know that there are people that have MP3 players from Dell, Creative, and the like, and Urge is a viable option for them...but there's no way that Microsoft can compete with the iPod user base, not when they're going to have to contend with other companies like Napster that are trying to do the same thing.

Even with the virtual OS monopoly, there's only so far that a giant market presence can take you. It's not quite the same thing, but look at Sony and the UMD as an example of what could happen here.

Re:What's the logic here? (5, Interesting)

WalterGR (106787) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378179)

People are stupid, but given the choice between owning DRMed music that you can burn or renting it and watching it all vanish when you stop paying...well, I'd hope that people aren't that stupid.

I subscribe to Rhapsody [real.com] , so I guess I am that stupid.

I know some people feel very... passionately... about "renting" music rather than "owning" it. But I like having access to thousands upon thousands of tracks that I can listen to at any time. Rhapsody has two million tracks.

Am I going to listen to all two million? Of course not. But I have extremely varied tastes and like exploring new music. Last week I was listening to my favorite indie tracks, then I got bored. So I started checking out world music - African, Caribbean, Brazilian. Then I got bored and listened to some hip-hop. Then I got bored and listened to some music from Rent.

In a given week, I'll listen to hundreds of different tracks - most of them brand new to me. How much do I pay? About $12.

But that's ok, call me stupid. ;)

Re:What's the logic here? (1)

Gothic_Walrus (692125) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378209)

First off, no offense intended - it was a generalization, and the fact that you can write in coherent English to post here takes away the "stupid" automatically. :)

I probably shouldn't have used the word "owned;" what I meant to get across there was simply that having the ability to burn the music could very well be the deciding factor. In fact, Rhapsody's a better example here than iTunes is...

If you had the choice between two services with the same functionality but one gave you the ability to burn the music - even if you do have to pay more to do so - which would you choose? Like I said, the fact that the songs vanish when you stop paying is a bit disconcerting, but if you can hold onto the material you really enjoyed so you can use it after the service is dead and gone, that seems like a pretty big plus to me.

Re:What's the logic here? (1)

MBraynard (653724) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378227)

If you had the choice between two services with the same functionality but one gave you the ability to burn the music - even if you do have to pay more to do so - which would you choose?

Depends on how much more. And if you even listen to music on CDs. I listen either on my comp or through my MP3 player or the mp3 player + fm transmitter in my car.

I download more new songs a month than would cost to buy through Itunes rather than 'rent.'

Another minor detail on the PlaysForSure - you can buy to burn the songs, but they are only $0.79 each, not $0.99.

Bad Faith Again. (1)

twitter (104583) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378191)

Even with MTV and Microsoft pushing it together, I think that the fact that you can't burn the music is going to turn away most of their potential customers.

Uhhh, how about the big stab in the rear end this is to Napster, the other "also rans" and their customers? If you have a subscription to one of these other services, you might wish you could have burned those songs because M$ is (from the article),

doing something drastic: It's throwing its own MSN Music store under the bus and launching a new music program that spotlights another company's service.

So Napster is going out of business and everyone gets to download all of their rent-a-music again? Loser. How long till those five gigs of Napster tunes quit playing on your snazzy M$ player? Hey, if you pay extra, the new service will let you walk around with your music on ONE device. Now that's the kind of stability and service we have all come to expect from the M$ Monopoly. Total loser. Given that, who the hell is going to buy into the next loser service?

Pigopolists, screw them all. Get a Tekstor (does ogg and mp3), any cheap-o music player from Walmart or a used Iriver and Rockbox. Get Amarok. Keep all your old music from CD and get your new music from archive.org and magnitune.com. Never worry about DRM again. The only people between you and your music should be one or two crazies in the mosh pit.

Re:Bad Faith Again. (1)

MBraynard (653724) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378215)

Boy are you stupid. Napster and Yahoo Unlimited and Rhapshody aren't going out of business - they are in the same biz as Urge. What is going down is the MSN Music Store - which is not part of those other services at all.

Re:Bad Faith Again. (1)

willyhill (965620) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378225)

Here's an idea: Don't use it. If it bothers you enough to fly off the handle with your "M$" and "Windoze" conspiracy theories, then don't use it. Don't. It's that simple. I fail to see where the "bad faith" is here.

Now the real voting begins.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378098)

The geekier folk knew this is where Microsoft was heading with this technology from the outset.

Now the decisions about our rights are in the hands of Democracy's second teir. Will people vote to oppose this technology with their dollars or ignore the implications to their rights and spend $179.40 a year for the ability to hear all of last years music this year too?

Re:Now the real voting begins.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378116)

Now the decisions about our rights are in the hands of Democracy's second teir.

You slashdot nerds are too much, acting like this music service has anything to do with fundamental rights or democracy shows how far gone you are.

Not too much different from the shitballs who claim that a publisher not publishing a book or a news story is denying someone their first amendment rights.

Re:Now the real voting begins.... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378170)

Dear Mr. Clueless,

          Freedom rarely deteriorates in one overhyped WMD hunting spree. The more usual path involves enormously wealthy corporations and people nudging the public's expectaions of freedom down a notch in return for something "free or easy."

          When gas is $4 a gallon, and all content on all media is rented and controlled by large corporations, and your college textbooks are inaccesible because you missed a payment maybe it will come into focus. The year may be 2008. If this generation doesn't wake up to these realities, you'll be the 47 year old virgins sitting in your basements sipping brocoli milkshakes singing "I'm and Oscar Meyer Weiner."

          Sincerely,

Old timer (who used to take his gun to school every day for rifle shooting competitions)

Re:Now the real voting begins.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378210)

Whatever dumbfuck. Someone being able to control the media THAT THEY FUCKING OWN is not infringing on your rights and has nothing to do with democracy. Is it a dumb business model? maybe, but that also has nothing to do with your freedoms.

Re:Now the real voting begins.... (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378182)

I really don't see the problem. For one, it is music, and it doesn't take away from your ability to buy albums outright if you wanted, nor is their any real coersion unless you are dumb enough to not pay the bill.

Sure, the tracks "die" when you stop the subscription, but that's the understanding you were supposed to be getting when you sign up, they weren't telling you you were buying-to-keep an infinite number of tracks for $149 a year. Any assumpion otherwise is that of people that can't or even read at a basic level or don't even read the ad copy.

Anyway, people that don't like it don't have to subscribe, it is simply another option. It's about the same cost as commercial free satellite radio subscription but you control the tracks and when they play. And guess what, you don't pay the radio subscription, it ends too.

Re:Now the real voting begins.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378214)

I agree. My comment may have waxed fatalistic.

While we still have a choice there is no problem with this service.

If this model catches on, there will be "exclusive releases" in this format and later full albums obtainable only through very advanced DRM. That's where Microsoft and other big labels want this to go. They don't want to have to come up with new fresh content every month to get your $15. They want to set things up so that if they don't get their $15 you lose access to all your music...

It's about getting the same profit on half as much creativity. It's about control.

One thing's for sure.... (1)

Davus (905996) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378099)

you can't shop at this store-- or even just play your Urge downloads -- in any earlier version of Windows Media Player
It's not a defect... It's a feature!

And it's the same on iTunes (1)

jdbartlett (941012) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378233)

It sounds like a unique complaint, which is silly, because any song downloaded from iTMS on iTunes >= 6 can't be played on iTunes 6, and iTMS is just as locked into iTunes.

I am the only one who (0)

Rooked_One (591287) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378107)

just wants a MP3 OGG MPEG player that has no frills? I just want a graphic equilizer and a couple of visual options and i'm golden. Oh wait, thats what they called *I was going to link this*the old version of winamp *but it looks like the AOL owned company even offers that anymore*.

I guess I don't get the whole "fix it if it isn't broken" mentality.

Heres where someone needs to chime in and mention that i'm forgetting about 8.1 surround sound and other high def things... my retort - i think i'm like most in that my needs are simple - and think that something that will make an air conditioner sound in a movie sound, is lame.

I'm going to play some battlefield 2 now (btw, we need to add modifiers that say "what the hell +1"

Re:I am the only one who (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378151)

Nope, I'm with you. I still have an old version of WinAmp (back from the 2.0 series) that I install on all my Windows computers- it fills what I need perfectly. I rather doubt I'll ever update it.

Re:I am the only one who (1)

Kamineko (851857) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378219)

I'll take Media Player Classic loaded up with Quicktime and Real alternatives every time. Maybe we'll have Urge Alternative soon, too...

Re:I am the only one who - try VLC (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378169)

Have you tried VLC [videolan.org] Its basicly a no-frils media-player that runs on everything and plays almost-any file type. Its one of my favourites, as it does playing songs and does it well (well it also streams stuff and converts between formats, but it doesn't shove all the extra stuff in your face) see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VLC_media_player [wikipedia.org]

Re:I am the only one who (1)

UngodAus (198713) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378181)

It has actually created a new niche. DWIW media players like foobar2000 http://www.foobar2000.org/ [foobar2000.org] . Even amarok in it's default layout is nicely navigable. Extraneous options hidden behind either menus or sidebars.

Re:I am the only one who (3, Informative)

Masami Eiri (617825) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378194)

http://www.oldversion.com/ [oldversion.com] I'm pretty sure you can snag Winamp 2.x there.

That's sick. (1)

Stoutlimb (143245) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378108)

I think that's just sick. They take our culture, make it proprietary, then rent it back to us at an astronomical fee. It's OUR culture, it should be free.

Re:That's sick. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378142)

What have you personally contributed to "our" culture lately?

Re:That's sick. (1)

Stoutlimb (143245) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378218)

Are you implying that someone has no culture unless they contribute to it first?

Re:That's sick. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378150)

agreed. music is music and doesn't need safe-guarding... people will still buy CD's or MP3CD's. Now they just buy them out the back of my van.

Oops! Someone Didn't Proofread (bad Enter key) (-1, Troll)

70Bang (805280) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378111)



This is not a flame. If someone wants to be on the "editorial board" they need to be a little more careful when they post stories. Otherwise, resign and let those of us who can write do so.

Let's be real. I have foot surgery this week and will be restricted to the couch for at least a month (as in, potentially longer). Time for NetFlix!! I'm more than willing to deal with this type of thing when others appear unable.

From the top story:

"...and it's integration..."

(it's means it is)
If someonoe declares "grammar Nazi!", let's remember two things:

1) Do you really want to fulfill Godwin's law so quickly? (one message?)
2) Those who call others "grammar Nazis"[1] are usually "grammar idiots".


[1] The punctuation Nazis can pretend I wrote Nazi's.


Re:Oops! Someone Didn't Proofread (bad Enter key) (4, Funny)

w9ofa (68126) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378129)

someonoe

Not only do I declare you a grammar Nazi, I also declare you a spelling Frenchman.

Re:Oops! Someone Didn't Proofread (bad Enter key) (3, Insightful)

east coast (590680) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378139)

1) Do you really want to fulfill Godwin's law so quickly? (one message?)

"Godwin's law" (which the term itself I hate) is so stupid that it's a shame that it's even still mentioned anywhere.

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving any subject matter approaches one.

It's just plain foolishness that people invoke "Godwin's law" to defend themselves.

Re:Oops! Someone Didn't Proofread (bad Enter key) (1)

UngodAus (198713) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378161)

I was fine until the [1].

Signed,
A random apostrophiser.

This song will self-destruct in five seconds... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378113)

Sorry, but I'll stick to buying CDs and rip them to MP3s... it's cheaper and more flexible.

Yo!MTV Craps (5, Funny)

ystar (898731) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378119)

I have the URGE to avoid this.

psh.. (4, Funny)

zx-15 (926808) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378133)

Microsoft imposing its own proprietary standards using dominant position in OS market... Such a cliche

No iPod support. Buh-bye! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378136)

Without iPod support, this service will go over like a fart in a confessional.

I give it six months of hemmorhaging money before they give up and quietly pull the plug. A year, if Microsoft is especially stubborn.

And then they'll go right back to making loud pronouncements about how the iPod/iTunes juggernaut is on borrowed time, and plotting their next doomed attempt to compete with it.

they gave a hint (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378137)


they dropped a hint/clue here:

"it will only play on media player 11"

Ain't buying it. I bet it is possible to play it on 10 and avoid the drm, that's why they want you to "upgrade" to the more locked down version.

I'm not a windows guy but you folks who are so inclined and equipped, I would look there (at ten) first before trying to figure out how to dodge it in 11.

vista (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378138)

At least this is not going to be a vista only thing.

Re:vista (0, Flamebait)

Saedrael (880381) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378168)

Yeah- now people using XP can be ripped off as well.

Salesforce.com (5, Insightful)

thealsir (927362) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378146)

Looks like the teasing from the CEO of CRM got microsoft in a squeeze. Subscription this, subscription that. People aren't going to be too warm and fuzzy to the idea of having to pay continuous fees just to listen to music. I mean, a lot of music you just listen to off and on, and paying over and over again just seems absurd.

Electricity, water, resources that have fixed, continuous costs, that makes sense in the consumer's eye....but software? Music? Digital stuff with practically zero reproduction cost? This is what drives people to piracy...they can't visualize the need for software et al to have continuous fees...it feels like extortion.

Despite how justified/neat business model it may be, that's what the average person deep down thinks. RIAA et al do not understand this. MSFT seems to have followed the same path.

Divx? Does anyone remember them (2, Interesting)

popeye44 (929152) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378147)

I was happy as a Clam when they folded.. and i'll happily NOT install this version on anything I have. For just 1 million dollars you might actually be able to OWN a song and put it anywhere you want it.. But it'd have to be DRM'D so you could never give it to anyone else. Bah music companies sicken me.

No thanks. (1)

lewp (95638) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378163)

I'll just keep stealing my music.

Why is anybody still on the Win32 Platform? (0, Flamebait)

domc (11897) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378184)

Spend $200 on your local geek, you cheap bastard, and have him hook you up with a real AV system.

Dom

Weasel words (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15378189)

$14.95 ($149 a year) lets you transfer those downloads to most newer Windows Media-compatible players.

So-- most, but not all, "newer" WMA-compatible players, eh? Well that means that some of those newer players won't be compatible, and chances are that those newer ones were stickered with the "Plays For Sure" logo.

"Plays For Sure," indeed. Looks like we're right back to the usual Microsoft way- "It should work, but it might not, but if it doesn't we don't know why, but it's not our fault."

Lousy Article; misses a real problem with Urge (5, Informative)

MBraynard (653724) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378195)

The writer probably was unfamiliar with the other services that have been out for over a year that have the same offering - Napster, Yahoo Unlimited, and several others.

What Urge is missing - and what I was looking forward to - was a low low intro price for the first year. I got the first year of Yahoo - including to go - for $60.

Also, Urge is more expenensive than Yahoo as you can get the non-to-go version for only $5 at Yahoo rather than $10 at Urge.

All the other complaints in the article - old news. Either the PlayforSure thing is for you or it isn't.

wonderful (2, Funny)

krotkruton (967718) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378208)

This sounds exactly like something I, a 22 year old CS major, would love. I mean, being a CS major, I love Microsoft, and who in the right mind doesn't want to have all sorts of restrictions put on their music? Combine that with MusicTV, who is just so popular with everyone over the age of 13, and you've got a recipe for for some great sales. I can't wait to get episodes of Yo' Mamma for a monthly fee. I'm not sure why everyone else is talking about music or competing with iTunes since MTV hasn't played any music in years, but at least we can look forward to Date My Mom on our computers.

Not a consumer-oriented model (1)

E-Lad (1262) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378231)

I'll take purchase-to-own for $0.99, Alex.

As much as people tend to bash it, but speaking in relative terms, iTMS still has the most consumer-friendly terms compared to other major players out there. Subscription models work only for magazines and pron accounts... an no one takes my magazines away if I end my subscription to it.

Compulsory License (1)

Comrade Pikachu (467844) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378232)

Effectively, isn't this an awful lot like a compulsory license? The difference here, I suppose, is that it is voluntary and is enforced by private industry rather than government.

Hasn't the EFF proposed a compulsory license plan as a solution to the problem of file sharing? That makes it good, right?

Worst of Both Worlds (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 8 years ago | (#15378234)

MTV doesn't play music recorded over 17 years ago, which is nearly all I'm interested in listening to. Original copyright law released all monopoly control of those recordings. By rights, I shouldn't have to pay anyone to listen to the folk music from the previous generation.

If the recording industry actually worked under that fair system, they'd have to sell a lot better quality new music to actually earn a living off current recording artists. Instead, they just rip off everything they possibly can, and pump brand new unlistenable crap at us.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>